Re: [HCDX] DAT vs. MD

["T. Bankson Roach" <sigint@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

----- Original Message -----
From: <HaraldKuhl@xxxxxxx>
Subject: [HCDX] DAT vs. MD


> >  From:    sigint@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx (T. Bankson Roach)
>
> >  Another favorite hobby device is the Sony TCD-D7 DAT recorder. With
this
>
> Also used such a nice machine for quite a while, and it really was
highly
> effective. But then I changed to a portable MiniDisc-recorder, which
costs
> much less, consumes much less power, and also offers the possibility
to
> record the exact date and time of the reception (at least some
models).
> Furthermore, MiniDiscs are a lot cheaper than DAT tapes (at least here
in
> Europe) and provide nice possibilities for editing the recordings. One
> MiniDisc gives you 148 minutes of recording time (mono; 74 minutes in
> stereo). You can give each recording a name, which will then appear on
the
> display of the recorder. When it comes to taping highly complicated
digital
> modes, however, a DAT recorder seemingly still is the better choice.
>

The DAT has some tremendous disadvantages, at least for use in the
field. It is about as sturdy as wet toilet paper and mine has broken
more times than not while in the "wilds". The mini-disc sounds like a
better way to go, as long as they keep making mini-discs, and assuming
it is a bit more hardy in mechanical structure. I get all the DAT tapes
I want free from a friend. His company uses them to back up sensitive
computer data, so they aren't about to put them in a Dumpster. Instead,
I get them.

> >  to the receiver the HF-1000 is. I hope someday to make a comparison
of
> >  the TenTec RX340 to the Watkins Johnson. As good as the WJ is, I'll
bet
> >  the RX340 is better. Time marches on!
>
> It certainly does. On the other hand, the RX340 kind of looks quite
similar
> to the HF-1000. And when WJ stopped the HF-1000, soon after the RX340
was
> announced. Any conclusions?
>

They look VERY similar. There are some real diffirences, especially on
the front panel and the "knobs" and displays used to show and set
receiver parameters. The TenTec accepts a wider range of external
frequency standards. The real difference would probably be in how low
noise the front end is. In most instances this might not matter, but
with a quiet antenna like a Beverage, it might make a real difference.
Also, the DSP circuitry seems more encompassing then the HF-1000, and
apparently you won't "need" the Sherwood SE-3 for audio. Also the TenTec
apparently can use passband tuning  for other than CW mode.

Tom Roach



_______________________________________________
Hard-Core-DX mailing list
Hard-Core-DX@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www2.hard-core-dx.com/mailman/listinfo/hard-core-dx
http://www.hard-core-dx.com/